In spite of the sanitary issues (made more prominent by the government screwing up flu shots), making screeners change gloves is one way to assert what little authority passengers have these days. Yes, it slows things down. Yes, it inconveniences screeners. So what?

When it's time for my gate-grope or the search of my carry-on, I usually wait until the last possible second, look surprised at the screener and say (in a calm, non-threatening manner, of course), "I assume you're going to change your gloves before you touch me (or my stuff)." If I get something short of "Yes, sir" or any resistance, my next exchange is (more sternly), "That wasn't a question."

If the box of new gloves is within my view, I simply make sure I demonstratively watch him change his gloves. If he disappears behind something, I will say, "I want you to show me that the box contains fresh gloves and I want to watch you change gloves because I don't want you to just fake it." Once, in DEN, I had a screener rummage through a bunch of drawers at the checkpoint and say, "I'm sorry. I can't find any that are my size." My retort: "That sounds like a personal problem."

Making screeners change gloves is one of the few forms of social protest we have available to us. I've had screeners and their supervisors whine and complain about changing gloves, but I have never had one absolutely refuse. I'm prepared to call a cop over if that ever happens.

I know it's petty, but darn it, it's worth it every time.

To make it even more painful for TSA, assert that you have a latex allergy (I actually do have one) and demand plastic gloves. They'll have to make a special trip to get a pair, and they won't be happy about it. :)

umm
 

We dont use latex, its nitryl or vinyl. WE dont change gloves unless they blow out (tear). We have to change them at your request. ITs a pain in the ... because they are hard to put on sweaty hands.

Cha-ching! Effective with my next flight, I am adding a new step in my screening proceSSSS. :D

Called me a puritan if you want (that'll be the first) but yeah I would say coming through a security checkpoint half naked is disruptive. Another time we had an old lady who got sent to secondary take off her clothes and throw them on the floor. Pretty much things came to a halt because most passengers couldn't believe what they were seeing. The same thing happened to a lesser extent with the previous example I mentioned. It's not something that reacts well with other passengers in line. There's a time and a place of everything and that's not it. :)

There is absolutely no excuse for a screener (or supervisor!) whining about changing gloves. What they need to remember is that wearing gloves is a two-way street. Sure, the gloves are there to protect us, no doubt about that, but the gloves are also there to protect the passenger from us (and other passengers). Maybe it's my germaphobia coming into play here, maybe it's my dental school background, but I change my gloves quite a bit, admittedly not between every passenger (then I use antibacterial gel on my gloves), but between every few. There is no excuse for not changing gloves and there's no excuse for not having any around.

OK, you're a puritan! :)

But seriously, I never suggested doing anything inappropriate at the checkpoint itself. I proposed requesting a private screening and undressing there -- and only there. I wouldn't be disrupting anything. And the interests of "security" would be well-served because any fool could see that I was carrying no weapons or explosives. I cannot understand the TSA's determination to touch me when I offer an even better alternative. It really makes no sense. I'm sure I'm not the only one who is happy to be naked but greatly resents being touched against my will.

Bruce

A couple of years ago at ORD, I was SSSSed and requested a private screening. This was before the new pat-downs. I went into a room that was hardly private. It was filled with people getting their own "private" screenings. We were literally bumping into each other. It was a madhouse.

I started taking off my clothes and didn't stop until the screener said, "OK, that's enough." He took a look at me in my underwear, felt my clothes and let me go. I'd do it again any time.

Bruce

I hadn't thought about this angle. I'll definitely throw it into the mix next time I have some fun with a screener.

I don't know, Bruce. Call me unreasonable, but I don't want to be touched or strip for them, especially in the name of false security.

But I certainly agree with your preference to be visually inspected.

The last two times I've been SSSSed at SFO they have been wearing latex gloves. YMMV.

>>> latex vs. non-latex gloves

You might have to wait there while the screener goes to get some non-latex gloves you asked for.

I'm one of those guys who often wears just one thick sweatshirt. Would I be arrested as disruptive if I didn't take it off in the security arch when asked to? (I would at least ask to go somewhere partly private) Would they make an example of me to stress that underwear is suggested for flying?

In summer I often wear very skimpy tank tops, you know, with huge arm openings for my not so huge arms. Exactly how much of me needs to be covered to not be disruptive?

>>> Team Flyaway tear-away gear

Was Janet Jackson's wardrobe (Jan. '04 Super Bowl) intended to fail. It looked that way to me even as seen on poorly received non-high definition TV.

>>> Ask to go to a private area for a strip search

Supposed that those who asked were given a screener of the opposite sex?

Travel tips:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/travel2.htm#Hot3

Got drenched on one of those raft rides at Walt Disney World. A block from the exit an employee approaches me: "Sir, you wil have to put on your shirt. I know it is wet but ..." (I forget the rest of the sentence).

There
 

We were having issues with free floating NO3 molecules on the cheap gloves.
Guess what the result was?

They started with opposite gender intimate searches! let us think back to the way things once were. The Europeans who complained of intimate vaginal prodding by male searchers at US airports were viewed as dangerous foreign radicals by the DOT/FAA.

The TSA was once a lonely circle of empty chairs and relied upon the BOP prison precedent. As the Bureau of Prisons largely resolve issues of sexual assault by simply denying it, things got off to a very bad start.

The DOT/FAA decided that instead of a bona fide system with sexual assault complaints being made to the local police (the proper authority), they would simply offer a form email service instead.

The local police were to be bullied into walking away and the TSA became the first 'quasi-police agency' to offer a reportage facility for sexual assault by internet form and only by internet form. Two things happened to make things a little better.

Cabin crew (female) began screaming about dozens and dozens of sex assaults by male searchers and Indian and Asian girls complained (with some justification) that their marrage prospects were being damaged by inappropriate opposite gender searches at US airports.

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn MP (Westminster, London) asked the US Ambassador to the Court of St. James for a training video of the searches and the US was eventually shamed into halting the abusive searches.

If it is bad now, remember how bad it was before a few brave souls risked no fly lists etc. to try and invoke a little sanity.

Help me out here :confused: we are talking about vaginas and penis' right?

Dunno about you, by my wifes vagina doesn't become a "sexual area" until such time as she lets it become that. The rest of the time it is a functioning vagina. And ya know what, my penis works the same way.